Evaluation of Pre-service Science Teachers’ Argumentation Skills, Knowledge Levels and Attitudes Regarding Organ Transplantation and Donation

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate pre-service science teachers’ argumentation skills, attitudes and knowledge levels regarding organ transplantation and donation (OTD). Teachers play a fundamental role in providing information to children/adolescents and could influence their attitudes. Organ transplantation is a life-saving hope for many people, but shortage of organs for transplantation is a universal problem. Having a positive attitude and true knowledge are essential for teachers that affect students’ future attitude toward this topic. The research method was descriptive and cross-sectional. The sample of research was 472 pre-service science teachers, who were sampled by using convenient sampling method and are students of Science Education Department at four different public universities. Data collection instruments were developed by researchers as valid and reliable questionnaire in order to determine the attitudes, knowledge levels and argumentation skills of pre-service teachers regarding OTD. Results observed that the pre-service science teachers' argumentation skills in a socio-scientific subject such as OTD were at a very low level, their attitudes were at a moderate level, and their knowledge level was above the average. Results of the study have shown that graduated high school type and grade level have played important roles in the positive attitudes, high argumentation skills and high knowledge level about organ donation. No significant difference was found in the attitudes and knowledge level of pre-service science teachers toward OTD in terms of gender. The gender only affected the ability of argumentation.

Keywords

• Pre-service teacher attitude,argumentation skill,knowledge level,organ transplantation,organ donation

Kaynakça

1. Adithyan, G. S., Mariappan, M., & Nayana, K. B. (2017). A study on knowledge and attitude about organ donation among medical students in Kerala. Indian Journal of Transplantation, 11(3), 133–137.
2. Akin, H. (2007). Cukurova Universitesi fen-edebiyat fakultesi ve egitim fakultesi ogrencilerinin temel biyoetik konulari hakkindaki gorusleri [The views of the student at the faculty of science and literature and the Faculty of Education at Cukurova University about the main topics of bioethics] (Unpublished master's thesis). Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey.
3. Alat, I. Akpinar, A.M. Egri, M. Aydın, N. Aydemir, I.K. Aldemir, M. Eroglu, T. Ozgur, B. Erbas, F., & Nisanoglu, V. (2007). The conviction of patients and hospital attendants on tissue and organ transplantation, Journal of Anatolian Cardiology, 7(3), 316–317.
4. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1990). Communities of learning and thinking, or a context by any other name. In D. Kuhn (Ed.), Contributions to human development, Vol. 21. Developmental perspectives on teaching and learning thinking skills (pp.108–126). Basel, Switzerland: Karger.
5. Chakradhar, K., Doshi, D., Srikanth Reddy, B., Kulkarni, S., Padma Reddy, M., & Sruthi Reddy, S. (2016). Knowledge, attitude and practice regarding organ donation among Indian dental students, International Journal of Organ Transplantation Medicine, 7(1), 28–35.
6. Ciftci, A. (2016). 5., 6. ve 7. siniflarda fen derslerinde argumantasyon kalitesinin incelenmesi [Investigation of fifth, sixth and seventh grade students’ argumentation quality in science lessons] (Unpublished master's thesis). Mus Alpaslan University, Mus, Turkey.
7. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluation quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
8. Cross, D., Taasoobshirazi, G., Hendricks, S., & Hickey, D. T. (2008). Argumentation: A strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 837–861.

9. Demiral, U., & Cepni, S. (2018). Fen bilgisi ögretmen adaylarinin sosyobilimsel bir konudaki argumantasyon becerilerinin incelenmesi [Examining the argumentation skills of pre-service science teachers on a socioscientific issue]. Journal of Kirsehir Faculty of Education, 19(1), 734–760.
10. Downing, S. M., & Haladyna, T. M. (2006). Handbook of test development. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
11. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933.
12. Febrero, B., Rios, A., Lopez-Navas, A., Martinez-Alarcon, L., Almela, J., Sanchez, A., Sanchez, J., Parrilla, J. J., Ramirez, P., & Parrilla, P. (2014). Multicenter study of the attitude of secondary school teachers toward solid organ donation and transplantation in the Southeast of Spain. Clinical Transplantation, 28(2), 259–266.
13. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
14. Gurkan, G., & Kahraman, S. (2018). Development of an attitude scale to measure attitudes towards organ transplantation and donation of pre-service teachers. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(6), 1005–1016.
15. Hogan, K. (2002). Small groups' ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 341–368.
16. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757–792.
17. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In S. Erduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
18. Kavurmaci, M., Karabulut, N., & Koc, A. (2014). Universite ogrencilerinin organ bagisi hakkindaki bilgi ve gorusleri [Knowledge and views of university students about organ donation]. Koc University Journal of Education and Research in Nursing, 11(2), 15–21.
19. Khishfe, R. (2012). Relationship between nature of science understandings and argumentation skills: A role for counterargument and contextual factors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 489–514.
20. Khoddami-Vishteh, H., Ghorbani, F., Ghasemi, A. M., Shafaghi, S., & Najafizadeh, K. (2011). Attitudes toward organ donation: a survey on Iranian Teachers. Transplantation Proceedings, 43(2), 407–409.
21. Kocak, A., Aktas, E. O., Senol, E., Kaya, A., & Bilgin, U. E. (2010). Ege Universitesi Tip Fakultesi ogrencilerinin organ nakli ve bagisi hakkindaki bilgi duzeyi [Ege University Faculty of Medicine undergraduates' knowledge level regarding organ donation and transplantation]. Ege Journal of Medicine, 49(3), 153–160.
22. Kubiszyn, T., & Borich, G. (2013). Educational testing and measurement: Classroom application and practice (10th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
23. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319–337.
24. Lai, M. C. (2012). Nature of science knowledge and scientific argumentation skills in Taiwanese college biology students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University, Ohio, USA.
25. Lisowska, D., Budzinska, K., Scieranka, M., Mazur, A., & Smolen, E. (2017). Attitudes of students of Jan Grodek State High Vocational School in Sanok towards organ donation. Journal of Education, Health and Sport, 7(8), 1684–1699.
26. Lopez-Navidad, A., Vilardell, J., Aguayo, M. T., Albadalejo, C., Cabrer, C., Cuello, J., Echebarria, I., Martinez-Castelao, A., Tarres, M. , Vicente, R., Lloveras, J., & Viedma, M. A. (1999). Survey of secondary education teachers in Catalonia on donation and transplants. Transplantation Proceedings, 31(6), 2612–2613.
27. Mohammadpour, M., Mohammadpour, A., Ajam-Zibad, H., & Najafi, S. (2018). A study on the awareness, attitudes and performance of teachers towards the organ donation during 2016-2017. Nursing Practice Today, 5(2), 299–309.
28. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
29. Munro, B. H. (2005). Statistical methods for health care research. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
30. National Research Council (NRC). (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
31. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2006). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA. Paris: OECD.
32. Ozdag, N. (2001). Organ nakli ve bagisina toplumun bakisi [The view of the public towards organ transplantation and donation]. Cumhuriyet Nursing Journal, 5(2), 44–55.
33. Ozturk-Emiral, G., Isiktekin-Atalay, B., Altunok, H., Gokler, M. E., Onsuz M. F., & Metintas, S. (2017). Development of a reliable and valid organ tissue and donation and transplantation knowledge scale. Transplantation Proceedings, 49(2), 260–266.
34. Pouliot, C. (2008). Students’ inventory of social actors concerned by the controversy surrounding cellular telephones: A case study. Science Education, 92(3), 543–559.
35. Rios, A., Febrero, B., Lopez-Navas, A., Martinez-Alarcon, L., Sanchez, J., Guzman, D., Ramirez, P., & Parrilla, P. (2012). Knowledge of the brain-death concept among secondary school teachers. Transplantation Proceedings, 44(6), 1486–1488.
36. Rios, A., Febrero, B., Martinez-Alarcon, L., Lopez-Navas, A., Sanchez, J., Guzman, D., Ramirez, P., & Parrilla, P. (2010). Evaluation of attitudes toward living organ donation: A multicenter study of compulsory secondary school education teachers. Transplantation Proceedings, 42(8), 3106–3108.
37. Ryder, J. (2001). Identifying science understanding for functional scientific literacy. Studies in Science Education, 36(1), 1–44.
38. Sadler, T. D. (2011). Situating socio-scientific issues in classrooms as a means of achieving goals of science education. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research (pp. 1–9). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
39. Sadler, T. D., Amirshokoohi, A., Kazempour, M., & Allspaw, K. M. (2006). Socioscience and ethics in science classrooms: Teacher perspectives and strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 353–376.
40. Sadler, T. D., & Fowler, S., R. (2006). A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Science Education, 90(6), 986–1004.
41. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 71–93.
42. Sadler, T.D., & Donnelly, L.A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463–1488.
43. Saleem, T., Ishaque, S., Habib, N., Hussain, S. S., Jawed, A., Khan, A. A., Ahmad, M.I., Iftikhar, M. O., Mughal, H. P., & Jehan, I. (2009). Knowledge, attitudes and practices survey on organ donation among a selected adult population of Pakistan. BMC Medical Ethics, 10(5), 1-12. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-10-5
44. Saylan, A. (2014). Fen bilgisi ogretmen adaylarinin epistemolojik inançları; iklim degisikligi, nukleer enerji, ve organ bagisi ve nakli hakkındaki bilgi duzeyleri ile bilgi kaynaklarına olan guvenleri arasındaki iliskiler [Relationships among pre-service science teachers’ epistemological beliefs, knowledge level and trustworthıness on information sources: climate change, nuclear energy, and organ donation and transplantation] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
45. Shi, J., & Salmon, C. T. (2018). Identifying opinion leaders to promote organ donation on social media: Network Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20(1), e7. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7643
46. Simonneaux, L. (2007). Argumentation in socioscientific contexts. In S. Erduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom based research (pp.179–199). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
47. Simsek, O. F. (2007). Yapısal esitlik modellemesine giris: Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamalari [Introduction to structural equation modeling: Basic principles and LISREL applications]. Ankara, Turkey: Ekinoks.
48. Sturgis, P., Cooper, H., & Fife-Schaw, C. (2005). Attitudes to biotechnology: Estimating the opinions of a better-informed public. New Genetics and Society, 24(1), 31–56.
49. Weiss, J., Shaw, D., Schober, R., Abati, V., Immer, F. F., & Comite National du Don d’Organes (CNDO) (2017). Attitudes towards organ donation and relation to wish to donate posthumously. Swiss Medical Weekly, 147, w14401. doi: 10.4414/smw.2017.14401
50. Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). High school students' informal reasoning regarding a socio-scientific issue, with relation to scientific epistemological beliefs and cognitive structures. International Journal of Science Education, 33(3), 371–400.
51. Xiao, S. (2015). Children’s use of inscriptions in argumentation about socioscientific issues (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
52. Yildirim, A., & Simsek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel arastirma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences]. Ankara, Turkey: Seckin.
53. Zambak, M. (2014). Tibbi, sosyal ve saglık calisanlari acisindan organ nakli [Medical, social and health workers in terms of organ transplantation] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Beykent University, Istanbul, Turkey.
54. Zampieron, A., Corso, M., & Frigo, A. C. (2010). Undergraduate nursing students' attitudes towards organ donation: A survey in an Italian university. International Nursing Review, 57(3), 370–376.